The Pentagon is sending $50 million cargo planes straight from the assembly line to mothballs because it has no use for them, yet it still hasn’t stopped ordering the aircraft, according to a report. (www.foxnews.com) More...

I was wondering what their capacity would be. Load limit seems to be about 25K lbs. Doesn't the Forest Service have a floor limit of 3,000 gal or so?Attached is a link to Calif CalFire list of aerial tankers- the aged S-2 which upon which CalFire depends is about 1200 gal. The C-27J looks like it could augment, if not replace them. (I don't know the hourly operational cost of the S-2)

Brand-new planes of any capacity that can be counted on to be there in an emergency are preferable to depending upon an aged fleet of insufficient aircraft that don't always make it the fire when dispatched.

When tha squad of elite firefighters were burned alive, the request for 6 tankers was denied. The single tanker that was dispatched had to return to base because of

This was a forestry service response, that they wanted to use a few as smoke jumper aircraft. They said the aircraft would require extensive conversions to be used to deploy retardant and would be load limited below the standard they set for new aircraft. What I think is going on is that the forestry service has a purposed plan for the purchase of new aircraft, and that converting the C-27j would derail that plan. But they may be right. I know that with the C-130 when you carry liquid bladders the load weight had to be less than normal cargo.

I think I understand the FS perspective of very large capacity tankers in that they do get the biggest fires. I think there is a need for smaller capacity tankers as well that they are not addressing. I think there are fewer than a dozen MAFFS units for C-130's which also is a limitation. Didn't the FS define their minimum load limit as over 3,000 gal?

If that's true then it's an absolutely worthless plane, that should not even be built.

The math doesn't make sense. You have to remove over 3,000lbs of equipment in order to carry under 2,000lbs of cargo (retardant).

So in it's current configuration, the cargo plane can't carry any cargo

Worthless. Absolutely worthless.

Either the plane or the person who made the calculations is absolutely worthless. Sounds like someone had an agenda to push, and the numbers had to support the conclusion that was determined before any numbers were calculated.

Ok, thanks. That makes more sense. So if they don't remove all of that extra weight, they'd still be able to carry somewhere between 12-15,000 pounds of retardant (if your assumption about the weight I retardant is correct). Any amount is significantly more than zero, which is what the plane carries when you leave it in the desert doing nothing.

In the last decade US Forest Service tankers have dropped 75% from 44 down to only 11. A few of these planes converted for tanking retardant would help while the USFS gets it act together and puts a new generation of tankers in service.

Photofinish i accidentally reported this as spam while trying to double click my screen to zoom in and it confused it with the report button, i tried to find a write to the admin but couldn't find a spot

One of these(Fiat G 222), fitted with the MAFF system, crashed in Italy in the eighties...apparently the wing loading is very high and in turbulence, they had a high speed stall and crashed...Then the Air Force General in charge forbade them to fly below 1,000 feet, making the whole thing useless.

Sylvio Berlusconi who was then minister of Civil Security ordered the Canadair 215, who will fly ten feet off the ground if need be and never had a high speed stall.

They called us the Berlusconi Air Force versus the MAFF clowns...we actually were putting out fires in contrast to the MAFF system which is just a way for greedy politicos to fill their pockets with paybacks from Phoscheck and other chemical companies as the country burn!

Even in the US, the C-130 never go lower than 500 feet..another useless exercise as the ammonia then have time to evaporate and only clay dust reach the ground, not bothering the fire the least bit!Phoscheck DO NOT PUT FIRE OUT and is plain ammonia, which is highly toxic...and if it evaporate first, the phosphate clay dust do exactly nothing...it is touted as being a fertilizer...fertilizing burnt husks!!!Fact, the phosphate promote the growth of dangerous and toxic foreign weeds...just like the leftist democrats in the USA!

In LA, we were accused by the Air Force MAFF operators of killing ground personnel for dropping too low...Ridiculous, we dropped on the fire! Anybody there is dead and crispy! No, Air force drop very high, 500 to a 1000 feet...Private operators will drop much lower but they are not allowed to drop on the fire but way ahead of it US Forest Services has bankrupted most of them anyway(Too many bribes to pay!)

They could drop the restriction of not selling surplus aircraft to the private sector. The C-27 would be great up north in Alaska and Canada's Northern areas. They would be replacing old WWII cargo aircraft. It's got to be more cost effective.

For those of us old enough to remember Senator Goldwater (Reserve AF General) pased legislation requiring Army to give up Caribou & Buffalo aircraft in Viet Nam since it competed with the USAF mission. When it was shown the USAF was not supporting the Army in the 1990s, the Army asked for permission to compete for a transport aircraft which the C-27 won. USAF objected & had congress transfer the program to the USAF. They cancelled it & sent them to the boneyard even though other US Agencies & foreign countries offerred to buy the aircraft.

The decision was made to put the rotary wing aircraft in the Army and fixed wing in the Air Force, happened during LBJ's Presidency. Hence the 'Bou (I flew them in Vietnam) went to the Air Force. The Army still had some fixed wing, (Otter, Beaver, and some King Airs) and the Air Force still had some rotary wing, albeit small numbers. The Buffalo was the turboprop version of the Caribou and I never saw one in service in Vietnam, ('69-'70) as all they ever were was a test & evaluation program that ended in the mid 60s.

There is worse, Canadair(then General Dynamics) completed a program with the Convertiplane...for 80 million dollars, five operational airplanes who had double the payload, double the speed and double the range of the Osprey...with the whole research and certification program costing less than ONE Osprey!!!Moreover, the control mixing box was purely mechanical and totally bullet-proof, versus the Osprey who will crash if a jihadi shoot them a bad thought!

Actually it's the "Military Industrial Complex" and if you read what Ike said, you will also find he pretty much predicted the current regime's "Solyndra" fiasco.

To quote Ike (in the paragraph following the Military Industrial Complex) you will find,

"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present

•and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite."

Most pseudo intellectual elites conveniently miss the "rest of the story" when ranting about the "military industrial complex".

Sorry, Randy, Sherrod Brown is a big time liberal Senator. The problem is that too many politicians of all political affiliations look at military appropriations as a jobs program; and if there is an actual defense benefit that's icing on the cake.

I cannot see what the problem is here. These aircraft will be available for use at some time unknown but certainly likely to meet that unforeseen emergency when this particular type of ship is needed.

The US may have thousands of preserved aircraft of all types from B1's to B52's to F16's and even perhaps the SR-71 sitting in the dry deserts but what is the betting that some 'incident' may occur that even the best Pentagon analyst did not foresee and the Whitehouse issue the order to deploy? Does one wait for some factory to build them, do you worry about violating disarmament treaties or does one take off the wraps and use the reserve assets?

They are already built, money already expended and now it is perhaps time to make use for the greater good as with the reason for them to be built in the first instance!

This is a clear case of NIMBY (Not in MY Backyard). The two yardbirds from Ohio just couldn't see their pet project facility shut down so here we are! Unwanted aircraft for an unwanted mission. Why not dust off a few C-123s?

The US Forest Circus is one of those GOVERNMENT agencies that needs to be re-organized with a whole lot less people in it's "organization". It is a SERVICE......but way too fat with bureaucrats & regulations. In fact, we could actually do completely without them. And the whole "Dept. of the Interior". What interior? Yes, I may appear to state cynical ideas, but socialism is here folks, and you should be prepared for the "Obamaskis".

Easy solution. Cut all gov't budgets 10% every year automatically. Every year every manager will be trying to do more with less, like everyone else in the real world, moving money from things that are not important to things that are essential.

In 10 years time, all programs without a burning need nor a constituency will get zeroed out, making room for other better uses of the grandkid's money.

Actually the 2 largest foreign holders of US debt (China and Japan only hold a total of about $1.5 trillion out of total US debt which is about $17 trillion. All foreign holders total only about $4-5 trillion. Most US government debt is held by American individuals, banks, institutions and US government accounts.

The Chisese just hold lots of US Dollars from all those cheap goods they've sold Americans over the years. They're going to need all those foreign reserve currencies. They have a fake economy, which is about to implode. Everyone that I know that is working with high-net worth Chinese investors reports that they are desperately trying to get large quantities of money out of China, as soon as possible. They'd rather hold US dollars or any investment (commodities, businesses, assets) anywhere in the world denomated in US dollars or any other foreign currency, than Chinese currency (Rmb) or investments in China with exposure to the impending economic meltdown.

I'm much more concerned about the Chinese meltdown on the world economy, than a bunch of congressmen in DC making noise over trying to bring control to US gov't spending.

If you lived in this country, you would know how great it. The US is the Greatest country ever...I would never vote for obama or any other Liberal... I am not a Jerk, but I am a Gun Loving and Toting citizen who believes in my right to bear arms, and will do so freely and use it to defend myself. I do not kill anyone, but if they break into my house they may find them selves committing suicide via Home Owner protecting his life.

I am a American Citizen so shut up will you! Considering I'm a US Citizen I know full well what my fellow patriots are, and they are selfish egocentric gun and killing loving idiotic morons, we have a massive shooting every 3 months, we killed a innocent new mum for no reason,...I am truly embarrassed to be a American Citizen. And nobody except police officers and military personnel should be allowed to have guns. FYI if you love guns and believe in right to bears arms then yes you are idiotic egocentric jerk.

In that case, may I suggest you look into the Canadian laws governing slander and libel when you exercise your American free speech rights in Quebec. Your comments on this venue could be actionable where you choose to live.

What is wrong with a rifle or 2 in a pickup truck... Maybe he is going hunting... Did you check his gun...Was it truly loaded... If I were you I would look straight down the barrel to check it out... But I am not you, and not going to look down a barrel... It amazes me that there are people that think guns kill people.... There has never been a gun to get up and kill anyone. Guns are tools. Some tools are utilized in a good fashion, others are not.Hunting and self protection is good to have a gun as a tool, Robbing a bank is not a good use for a gun. No Gun has ever robbed a bank, No Gun has ever killed anyone but plenty of liberals like yourself feel that they do for some reason... Last time I checked on my guns they were right where I left them, and ready to protect me as needed... That does not mean that I kill people, but someone may not survive trying to inflict "Grievous Bodily Harm" then they may die as a result of their actions and my reaction. That is not being a Jerk... It is being an honest, legal, law abiding citizen.

Honest and legal nowhere else then in Dumb Ass USA...and I'm sorry but guns DO kill people! And I know a armed rifle when I see one they armed trust me. What is wrong with two armed rifles in a pickup?1. They are armed.2. Give me one reason why a civilian needs a gun that shoots some 100+ bullets a min.?3. Nobody except Police Officers and Military Personnel should ever be entitled to having a gun point. Civilians are not trained to have guns and it is just a ticking time bomb. If a civilian absolutely needs a defense weapon then get a Tazer but nothing else.

in regards to 1, SO WHAT... He certainly did not have them concealed and probably never robbed a bank or killed anyone.. In regards to 2, who said anything about a 100+ bullets... My carry gun has 7... That is all I need and will still have plenty to spare. and 3 is total BS. I have a permit and I have been trained. On the range I shot 50 times in different configurations and hit the bulls eye 49 times... the other one that I missed the bulls eye, but would have been a deady shot at 25 feet was with my week hand. There is training, and many people that carry responsibly are trained. As for a tazer.. They are ok, but Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson do a so much better job.

I remember once that I caught 2 kids (1 15 and 1 18 breaking into my car (on video). I went in behind them, commanded them out of the car, and held them at gun point and called the police. 2 Crimminals in jail. I could have shot them, but I was not in danger of "Grievous Bodily Harm", Referecnce: Grievous Bodily Harm

How do you figure that... I never killed anyone, never robbed a bank, and have a perfect record... But I do believe in protecting myself. However, I have been know to get in to reasonable conversations with unreasonable people as you can see from our chat here. Maybe you should consider going back to your mental hospitals. I am sure you would be an interesting subject for them to study.

I challenge you to give me one instance of a gun killing someone... Would it make you feel better if people killed people with knifes, clubs, Rocks, or pushed people off of tall buildings... At this point I am seeing you as a 100 percent certifiable idiot with no common sense... Do you have someone to help you out of bed and get something to eat, because with you line of thinking, I doubt you could figure it out.

Wherever guns are forbidden in the USA NOBODY IS SAFE and the mexican and black mobs rule the streets...where open carry is allowed, you have the lowest crime rate in the whole wide world...look at the most dangerous country in the world, Mexico...it is 20 year in jail for owning a gun, only narco and corrupt cops cans have a gun and you see dead people all over the streets.

Re your comments:First, 'then' should have been 'than'Second, "dumbass' in the way you are using it, is a single word. Third, how do you differentiate between an 'armed' and 'unarmed' rifle?To answer your "what is wrong with two armed rifles...." aside from the use of 'armed', in New Hampshire- nothing.Regarding your overgeneralization about civilians and training- in my specific case, I AM a civilian, and I was trained in the US ARMY. There are quite a few to my personal knowledge with similar histories.

You claim to have been kicked out of the USA and took refuge in Canada(fleeing the muslim invaders in France)Then explain all the pick ups I see looking out my window loaded with a moose on the hood and the cab full of guns HERE IN CANADA!

So I don't sound like a US Citizen because I'm embarrassed to be one and that I don't like guns or killing people? PRICELESS!!!!!!!!! I just goes to show how closed minded, egocentric, moronic,...my fellow patriots are! Thanks for proving my point!

The U.S. Air Force´s original C-27´s (five of them) were operational back in 1995 and based at Howard AFB in the Panamal Canal Zone were used extensively throughout Central and South America but a few years later the AF decided that it did not want them and sent them to pasture at Davis Montham. Eventually the U.S. Government gave those C-27s away to Colombia for helping in the anti-drug war. Years later the Army wanted a couple of dozen new C-27s but here came the Air Force screaming and kicking like a child saying that the Army has no business flying fixed wing aircraft, only the rotating wing variety and claimed for it the entire program. Go figure.

There is a mission for the Fiat 222/C-27Many areas in the USA are too far from water for the helicopters or water scoopers or single engine bombers, so this very fast and economical airplane would be an ideal first responder, once lightened up and loaded with gelled water...

After of course Barry Hussein and Moshwelle quit taking these 300 million dollars vacations...

There are a lot of good ideas on here to make good use of these aircraft, but under the current budget crisis/shutdown, no agency is going to be able to snag these up right now. We'll see if they end up anywhere after the dust settles, but for now, they are stuck. Coming from FOX news, this is nothing more than a stab at the current administration while we are in the midst of a shutdown. The government can't just stop taking these aircraft, because they will then be forced to pay for planes that we are not even getting to complete the contract, which IMHO is much worse.

Well the headline is a bit misleading.....Davis Monthan serves other functions than just boneyard and while the Pentagon does not want them, "mothballs" implies that they will be scrapped. But in the last line they do mention "other government agencies" are interested in using them.

The C-27 was portrayed as the poor man's Herky but at $ 50 million a piece.... no way. As for dusting off a few C-123s there are not any available, the inventory was washed out during the Viet Nam War and even if there were hundreds of them at Davis Monthan the Air Force types would never deign to lower their "high standards" and fly old carcasses using old recip engines, it is only the latest set of wings or nothing.

They never had a mission. From what I read a while ago, these planes were intended for special forces forward supply and transport in Afghanistan. But they ordered too many of them, and their mission was over before we took delivery.

I will never understand buying military hardware from a foreign country. Tax dollars going to a foreign countries workforce when we could definitely use the manufacturing jobs, and it just seems ridiculous to operate foreign equipment.

Well at least they are not being chopped up by the government, the fate that befel the brand new Royal Air Force Nimrods , weeks before we needed them in Lyibia! That's what happen when your country is run by schoolboys like Davie the C

THis is realizing that you cannot afford a steak dinner, and instead you ought to be eating Top Ramen, or maybe Mac-n-Cheese (that garbage in a box). You go ahead and order your steak dinner and upon delivery to the table, realizing that you can't afford it, you choose not to eat it - no doggie bag, no panhandler on Division and Third, but straight ot the garbage can next to the dishwasher. Our tax dollars hard at work!

Seems more like committing to a 5 year contract with Omaha Steaks, then deciding after a couple of years that you have no need for steaks every month. But the fine print in the contract says that if you cancel early, you must pay the full amount of the contract anyway plus a penalty.

These planes have been on order for a long time. They have been being built and being delivered on an ongoing basis for a while now (years).

You'd think as stewards of public monies, they'd be just as careful with orders for airplanes that will not be needed, as a private airline. In the real world, a buyer (airline) will find a new buyer for the planes as soon as possible, often before the planes are delivered. Airlines don't accumulate brand-new airplanes in the desert.

A government shutdown lasting days or weeks, highlighting the out of control spending, didn't cause this problem of brand-new planes sitting unused for years. Buy it may remind us that we should use all of monies and assets wisely, including brand-new airplanes, that may be useful somewhere.

Right now they are costing zero operating cost, the only cost with these planes right now is paying on a contract that we cant just back out of. Even if another agency were to be flying them right now, we would have the cost of buying them AND the cost of operating them, they are much cheaper doing what they are doing right now until someone can find good use for them and make it worth the money to operate, which is not going to happen for a little bit as all of these 5 year olds in DC have their playground stand off.

At least storing them is much better than dismantling and destroying them as others like the Brits have done in the past.

No commercial airline would carry brand-new airplanes as non-operating non-productive assets on their balance sheet depreciating their purchase price, while not being used to product revenue or some other important mission.

An airline or an invest spending their own money would be more careful to spend money only when necessary. Further if they contacted for brand-new planes years in advance (which happens all the time and is the norm in recent years) find that their airplanes on order are no longer necessary, as predicted at time of signing purchase contracts, or are no longer affordable, they will find a solution. Typically that would be to find a new buyer, who does have a good use for the planes. This often happens BEFORE the plane is even delivered to the original airline.

Why do we make excuses for and allow stewards of taxpayer money to be reckless with the hard earned money of the people?

I think the 'going concern' concept of business analogy is not a good fit for military purchases. The military model includes a goal of breaking things- usually on the other side, but there always is collateral damage to consider.

I agree that storing them is a much better strategy. Destroying them is a poor short-term strategy (unless you are in line to build the replacements when needed next month).

They are only parking them for a short period of time. Just about every branch of the GOV(military and Civilian) can fine a good use for these planes. I'm sure there's going to be a cat fight for them after the sequester/shutdown is over.

Not always, remember, what ever the US public knows, our enemies know as well. Do you really think that the government should tell us absolutely everything so that our enemies can just turn on a TV and know what our military is up to?

Sebass, there is nothing in here for your feeble mind to comprehend...You are a troll rat leaving his little toxic dropping everywhere,a typical Obamunist, a muslim wannabe, not very bright and understanding nothing.Dont you raton have a goat to fuck before cutting his throat?

Yes, lets buy only US stuff ! But don't be surprised then when foreign countries also decide to do the same, so not buying the F35 but buy Saab's; not buy Boeing but Airbus. Is very good for the US economy, yes ? And of course better stop all regional airlines in the US as they only fly foreign aircraft. Maybe next time first think before write ?

Congressional pay increases are limited, by law, to no greater than the General Wage Increase of the Civil Service. Since we have not had a GWI in two years, neither has Congress. I'm not areal fan of Congress right now, but I dislike disinformation even more

It is not waste to be prepared. If an Earthquake, storm, tidal wave, or a hockey match cuts off a community people will be happy to see these cute little prop planes landing on just about any strip to bring essential supplies.

I would rather see them built in America, but there is value to have aerospace relationships with other countries. If one of our plants is destroyed by calamity, we'd have a place to manufacture with already established lines of communication.

Seems to me that AMARC, formerly known as MASDC, aka "THE BONEYARD", is open for all branches of service to draw from. Sad if these brand new AC are having to go through the storage process before being sent to another user. While the desert climate is preservative, they are not just sent in there and parked

One of these(Fiat G 222), fitted with the MAFF system, crashed in Italy in the eighties...apparently the wing loading is very high and in turbulence, they had a high speed stall and crashed...Then the Air Force General in charge forbade them to fly below 1,000 feet, making the whole thing useless.

Sylvio Berlusconi who was then minister of Civil Services ordered the Canadair 215, who will fly ten feet off the ground if need be and never had a high speed stall.

They called us the Berlusconi Air Force versus the MAFF clowns...we actually were putting out fires in contrast to the MAFF system which is just a way for greedy politicos to fill their pockets with paybacks from Phoscheck and other chemical companies as the country burn!

Even in the US, the C-130 never go lower than 500 feet..another useless exercise as the ammonia then have time to evaporate and only clay dust reach the ground, not bothering the fire the least bit!Phoscheck DO NOT PUT FIRE OUT and is plain ammonia, which is highly toxic...and if it evaporate first, the phosphate clay dust do exactly nothing...it is touted as being a fertilizer...fertilizing burnt husks!!!Fact, the phosphate promote the growth of dangerous and toxic foreign weeds...just like the democrats in the USA!